[Ray Powell]

There are always interesting new lines of research but I agree we have already enough information to undermine the allegation. Peter’s suggested line of enquiry would be useful if more details about the voyage of the Abby are ever required but that should not be a priority at this time.

[Ray Powell]

On page 19 of
“Black metallurgists and the making of the industrial revolution” there is a misuse of a reference

The paper says:

“In 1784, as Cort’s second English patent was enrolled, politician and vocal supporter of
enslavement, John Baker Holroyd, declared ‘our knowledge of the Iron trade seems
hitherto to have been in its infancy’. In direct reference to the loss of the American war
and newly founded United States of America, he described the so-called ‘Cort process’ as
being ‘more advantageous to Britain than Thirteen Colonies’.208 Through Cort’s patent,
former colonies were to become markets for British manufactures and America’s revolution
to inaugurate a new paradigm for British extraction.209 Cort made the Holroyd
quotation the first testimonial of his promotional campaign material.210”

—
210. Cort, [1787], A Brief Statement of the Facts relative to the New Method of making Bar Iron
with Raw Pit Coal and Grooved Rollers, Appendix, 13.
—

The text of the referenced document can be found at
https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Mp1AU0YduvYC&pg=GBS.PP14&hl=ne
This is what the appendix says
‘
Extract from Lord SHEFFIELD’S “ Observations on the Commerce of the American States.”

IF Mr. Cort’s very ingenious and meritorious improvements in the art of making and working Iron,
and his invention of making bar Iron from pig Iron, either red short or cold short,
and the great improvements on the steam engines by Messrs. Watt and Bolton of Birmingham,
and Lord Dundonald’s discovery of making coke for the furnace, at half the present expence,—
should all succeed, as there is reason to think they will, the expence may be reduced so greatly,
that British Iron may be afforded as cheap as foreign,
even if the latter should be allowed to enter duty-free, perhaps cheaper,
and of as improved a quality, and in quantity equal to the demand.
It is not asserting too much to say, that event would be more advantageous to Britain than Thirteen Colonies.
It would give the complete command of the Iron trade to this country, with its vast advantages to navigation;
and our knowledge in the Iron trade seems hitherto to have been in its infancy.’

It is the success of all three improvements that “would be more advantageous to Britain than Thirteen Colonies. ” not just Cort’s alone.
John Holroyd became Lord Sheffield.

[Ray Powell]

I have been looking at the indexes to the Journals of the Assembly of Jamaica
I have found entries for John Reeder regarding his petitions. (The actual contents of the Journals do not seem to be openly available but the indexes give enough information regarding the content)

Like his petitions in England, there is no reference to any inventions regarding the processing of iron. This implies that he did not think anything new had been done.
Journals of the Assembly of Jamaica:
Vol VII
From 21st October 1777 to 23rd December 1783

Reeder, John—
Petition respecting his bond to the public, referred to a committee, 513;
report made, and referred to committee on state of the island, 540 ; resolution, 564.

Journals of the Assembly of Jamaica:
Vol VIII
From October the 19th 1784 to March the 5th, 1791

Reeder, John (10 Sess. A. 1785.) — Petition respecting his improvements in making sugar, referred, 102, (v. Murray).
— — — ibid.)—Petition respecting the dismantling of his foundery, referred to committee of accounts, 131;
report made, and referred to committee on stare of the island, I44;
resolution, 145, (v. Receiver-general).
(1 Sess. A. 1787.)—Message from the lieutenant-governor, in regard tn Mr. Reeder’s memorial to the lords or the treasury, on the same subject,
referred to committee on state of the island, 343;
resolution for a message to his honour in answer thereto, 344; message sent. 345.
(1 Sess. A. 1790.)—Petition for a bill to secure to him the benefit to arise from his discovery and invention of a varnish for copper,
and of jointing the seams of copper .without solder,
referred to a committee, 566 ; report made, and bill ordered , presented second reading appointed, committed, 569;
considered; reported, ibid..; passed, and sent to the council, 570; a (assented to, 571.

[Ray Powell]

I have included an extract from the Journals of the House of Commons concerning John Reeder’s petition.
The petition was presented in 1789. By this time Cort’s processes were in use at Cyfarthfa. Reeder was in need of income yet he did not revise his partition to claim that Cort had made use of knowledge obtained from his foundry in Jamaica.
Surely he would have done so if he believed that Cort had stolen ideas as that would have improved his case for a pension.

Journals of the House of Commons, Volume 44, page 500
26 June 1789
A Petition of Jchn Reeder was presented to the House, and read; Setting forth,
That the Petitioner completed an Iron Foundry, at the Expence of £.22,000 Sterling, in the Island of Jamaica where it was found highly
necessary for Sugar Plantations, His Majesty’s Ships of War, and for the Commerce of the Island, as will appear by the Certificates of
Admirals Sir Peter Parker and Sir Joshua Rowley, the Annual Emolument of which, in 1781, was £. 4,000; and that in the fucceeding Year 1782,
when the Island was threatened with an Invasion, by the combined Force of France and Spain, Sir Archibald Campbell, being apprehensive that
the Enemy might possess themselves of the Petitioner’s Foundry, from the Advantage of the Situation and Consequence, ordered it to be
dismantled, which was done; and the Legislature of Jamaica gave to the Petitioner £. 3,000 Currency, in Consideration of his Loss, and
recommended his Case to Government; and that the Petitioner did intend to apply to the House for Relief, but could not obtain His Majesty’s
Recommendation within the Time limited by the House for receiving Petitions for private Bills: And therefore praying. That he may be at
Liberty to present his Petition for Relief, not-withstanding the Time limited for receiving Petitions for private Bills is elapsed.

Ordered, That, in Consideration of the particular Circumdances set forth in the said Petition, Leave be given to present a Petition, as desired by the said Jchn Reeder.

Then a Petition of John Reeder One of His Majesty’s Justices of the Island of Jamaica; together with Copies ot Two Certificates thereunto annexed, being offered to be presented to the House;
Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, by His Majesty’s Command, acquainted the House, That His Majesty, having been informed of the Contents of the said Petition, recommends it to the Consideration of the House.
Then the said Petition was brought up, and read; Containing the same Allegations as the preceding Petition; and further Setting forth, That at the Time the Petitioner’s Foundry was dismanted for His Majesty’s Service, and the Preservation of Jamaica, his Situation, in Point of Fortune, was such as to render an Application to Government unneccessary: But His Situation, from this Event, and other Causes consequent thereupon, being now materially altered, therefore praying, That, agreeable to the Request of the Legislature of that Island, which has been transmitted to the Lords of the Treasury in due Form, the House will grant him such Relief as to them may seem meet.
Ordered, That the said Petition be referred to the Consideration of a Committee: And that they do examine the Matter thereof; and report the same, as it shall appear to them, to the House:
And it is referred to Sir Peter Parker, Sir James Johnstone, &c.: And they are to meet upon Monday Morning next, at Nine of the Clock, in the Speakers Chamber.

[Ray Powell]

Richard Williams says in his tabular refutation:
“There is no evidence presented otherwise that suggests that the two Corts were related or even knew each other.”

Other sources indicate that Cort was part of wider family with Lancaster connections.
Details of Henry Cort’s early life seem obscure but a legacy of £100 was left to Henry Cort in the will of Jane Cort, who lived in Lancaster.

Will of Jane Cort, Spinster of Lancaster , Lancashire
PROB 11/1317/3
Henry Cort – the great finer, page 16

Lancaster was the home port of the Abby.

However there is no suggestion in the paper that information about John Reeder was passed on via Lancaster.

[Ray Powell]

The paper contains two accounts of what happened to the the equipment in John Reeder’s foundry.

Firstly the paper says:
“Reeder’s reverberatory furnaces were ‘demolished’; his ‘works levelled with the ground’; his
machinery for making ‘barr [sic] iron’ rendered ‘totally useless’179; and anything ‘that might be
of use to the Enemy . . . carried on board his Majesty’s ships’,180 absorbed into a maritime
infrastructure that transported unused Naval stores and equipment, from Jamaica to the
Naval base in Portsmouth,181 where Cort operated.”
Reference 179 is dated 1782 and 1783

and later
“John Reeder’s foundry was dismantled
and loaded onto ships between 3 March and 3 May 1782”

There is no reference for this statement. Can this be deduced from the dates of documents?
It is a pity that none of these documents have been digitised.

Another summary of what happened is found in:
Goucher, C. L. 1990. John Reeder’s foundry: a study of eighteenth-century African-Caribbean technology. Jamaica Journal 23,1: page 40

“The buildings and equipment which had escaped being dismantled or buried during martial law in 1782, were destroyed by hurricanes the following year. All that could be recovered was equipment valued at £500 and this was sold by Reeder to pay debts. Reeder’s ill health and impoverishment were the subject of bitter and complaining correspondence. Finally, he died in England of a seizure some time before February 1806, and thus never obtained the promised pension.”

There do not appear to be any references to Reeder challenging Cort’s patents in the National Archives catalogue.

[Ray Powell]

Jenny Bulstrode asserts that African iron was superior to European. I have found a paper which is helpful in explaining the difference.

‘Voyage Iron’: An Atlantic Slave Trade Currency, its European Origins, and West African Impact*
Chris Evans, Göran Rydén
Past & Present, Volume 239, Issue 1, May 2018, Pages 41–70,

https://doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtx055

Here is an extract which suggests why European iron was thought to be inferior.

“There is something else that requires further study: the relationship between imported iron and the native product. This remains obscure. That there was an underlying geographical complementarity is plain enough; voyage iron flooded the forest zones whilst indigenous smelting was practised most successfully in the semi-arid interior. In that sense, the role of voyage iron was simply to make good a historic deficit in the tropical forests of West Africa. But European iron and African irons were not exact substitutes. Voyage iron was a malleable material from which every particle of carbon had been expunged. Its malleability meant that voyage iron was not suitable for the manufacture of tools that needed a cutting edge — things that could bite into wood or flesh — for it was too easily deformed. Historically, European manufacturers overcame that difficulty by welding a thin edge of steel onto a body of malleable iron. Such composite tools, combining hard but expensive steel with softer but cheap iron, were standard across Eurasia. In Africa they were unknown, no doubt because West African smiths worked up blooms which, being heavy with carbon, could be made into effective sharp-edged implements without the addition of welded steel. In European iron, therefore, artisans in coastal West Africa encountered a material that was quite unsuited for making bladed tools in the traditional African manner. “

[Ray Powell]

The exact relationship between Henry and John Cort seems to be unknown
but Henry Cort did come from Lancaster and there was some kind of family connection..
I cannot find any reference suggesting that Henry Cort himself was involved in either trading products produced by enslaved people or owning them although members of the Cort family certainly were, as noted in Jenny Bulstrode’s paper.
Amongst other references see van Batenburg, A. J. V. I. Kort historisch verhaal van den eersten aanleg, lotgevallen en voortgang der particuliere Colonie Berbice. Amsterdam: C. Sepp Jansz, 1807.
(The “kort” in the title is the Dutch word for “short”. The names of members of the Cort family can be found in the document)
However, this has no bearing on whether Henry Cort learnt about Jamaican iron working from John Cort.

The relevant documents at the Devon Heritage Centre are not available online so I have relied on :
Goucher, C. L. 1990. John Reeder’s foundry: a study of eighteenth-century African-Caribbean technology. Jamaica Journal 23,1:39–43.
This is available starting at
https://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00090030/00064/images/40
“The Reeder Foundry
The descriptions of technical machines and equipment were vague (except for the mention of the reverberatory furnace). It can be noted, however, that multiple furnaces were in use and the operations (given the range of products) were broadly multifunctional: casting, turning, forging, refining and possibly smelting.
According to the records, the eight acres of land purchased by Reeder contained ‘houses’ (more than one) and other buildings.6 Foundry workers included two hundred and seventy-six ‘Negroes’ and between thirty and sixty Europeans; the latter were employed on an occasional basis. The European presence was short-lived for several reasons. Skilled workers were difficult to lure to the Caribbean and expensive to employ, even on a temporary basis (as for setting up operations or training labour). Another reason is found in Church of England records which confirm a high mortality rate among the small population of English craftsmen.”

“The testimony brought to bear to support John Reeder’s attempts to obtain compensation for the foundry’s dismantling clearly indicates that the foundry was ‘of great use’ to Jamaican society in the eighteenth century. Various descriptions confirm the foundry’s working of both iron and non-ferrous metals, including brass, copper, and lead. A variety of articles was manufactured: large iron boilers, iron rollers for pressing canes, cast utensils, a brass train of artillery, brass howitzers, mortars, petards, cannon, shot, lead bullets, plus the general outfitting of British warships and other vessels. Admiral Sir Joshua Rowley testified that without the foundry no fewer than seven ships ‘otherwise would have remained in harbour until supplied from Europe’.
According to one of Reeder’s own descriptions, the foundry equipment had included ‘machinery for making bar-iron’.4 One solitary reference [letter from John Reeder to George Rose, 5 April 1787, Reeder Papers] makes mention of the foundry’s ‘reverberating furnaces’ having been demolished.
The article also says ”
At least one other died as a result of the trans Atlantic voyage, having been brought to Jamaica at considerable expense in about 1783 to restore the foundry. Thus, John Reeder was forced to rely on the skills of African and African-Jamaican metallurgists.
By Reeder’s own estimate, many Africans were ‘perfect in every branch of the iron manufacture so far as it relates to casting and turning… and in wrought iron…’
The Church of England records confirm that both slaves and free Maroons were employed in the foundry. Maroon smiths were highly valued.
A 1743 observer noted:
“The rebellious negroes in St. James forge their own ironwork, making knives, cutlasses, heads of lances, bracelets, rings, and a variety of other kind of necessaries, they have bellows which are made of wood… having for that purpose two negroes who… are always working them up and down.7”
4. Jamaica House of Assembly Journal, vol 8, 7 December 1785, p. 132;
Reeder complained that the machinery had been rendered totally useless and would remain so until people with the proper skills to put it in order were brought from England. One craftsman who had been so engaged at an expense of £140 died too soon after his arrival to have accomplished anything, according to Reeder.

The Black metallurgists were highly skilled.
It is a pity that the material about Henry Cort was introduced into the paper as the conclusion states that this was not intended to be the central concern of the paper.
“Euro American accounts have often described the combination of processes for which Cort took credit as one of the most important innovations in the making of the modern world. But the theft of this combination from Black metallurgists in Jamaica who
developed it was not the central concern of this paper.”.

I would prefer Jenny Bulstrode to revise the paper by removing the sections which reference members of the Cort Family. The paper would also need a new title.
This revised paper would still satisfy what is stated to be its main purpose.

[Ray Powell]

Details of the convoy, including the Abby, when leaving Jamaica, are given in Royal Gazette of Jamaica – 22 Sep 1781
I have found that the Abby did successfully reach Lancaster which was its intended destination.
Lloyds List No, 1312 23 Nov 1781
Lancaster
arrived from Jamaica
Abby, Cort
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015004281559;skin=2021;sz=25;q1=abby%20cort;start=1;sort=seq;page=search;seq=200;num=1319
This removes any possibility that John Cort landed in Portsmouth even though not arriving with the Princess Royal .

[Ray Powell]

Here is the rest of the letter

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Ray Powell]

Hello Richard,

I had thought that the mention of using grooved rolls was covered by the references.
However,  when I read the paper again I found that the statement is not directly referenced. As I do not have access to the documents by John Reeder which are given in the references I tell if it is covered by them.
Until an explicit reference in a historic document is produced is made available, it must be considered to be unproved.

I have been looking at newspaper reports about John Cort and his ship, the Abby.  He certainly visited Jamaica several times as indicated by advertisements in the Royal Gazette of Jamaica.

I have been following up reference 159 in Jenny Bulstrode’s paper. The report of the letter written by Sir Thomas Rich appeared in a number of newspapers including the Hampshire Chronicle 26 November 1781.

I have attached an image of the first part of the newspaper report of the letter

You will see that the Princess Royal lost contact with a number of ships including the Abby on the 6th November.

Jenny Bulstrode says ‘Later that same year he was returning from Jamaica in convoy,158 when the Abby was separated and taken off course. ‘[L]eaky, sickly and short of provisions’, they abandoned their intended destination of Lancaster. By dint of ‘incessant pumping’, with just ‘three days bread’ to spare, they weighed in at Portsmouth,159’

It was the Princess Royal which arrived at Portsmouth with “incessant pumping and three days bread”. Nothing is said about what happened to the Abby.  This letter seems to have been misread by Jenny.

The second attachment is the remainder of the report of Sir Thomas’s letter.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Ray Powell]

Most of the paper is taken up with establishing the credibility of the skills of the enslaved workers and why the repurposing of the scrap iron was of symbolic importance to them.

John Reeder made it clear that that scrap iron was being processed at the foundry and not locally produced pig iron, “plantation iron”.  Bundles of heated iron rods were passed through grooved rolls to produce bar iron. I, too, have looked for information on the net about sugar cane rolls as I had no previous knowledge of them.  There are photos of modern rolls which have circumferential grooves. I feel that some kinds of sugar cane rolls cannot be dismissed as offering no advantage over flat rolls given the statements about their successful use.

Henry Cort could not make money out of his contract with the Admiralty unless he could make use of the scrap iron which the Admiralty had supplied in part payment  for his work. Existing processes for doing this were costly and information about what was being done in Jamaica. would have been useful to him. However it is conjectural that this information flow actually happened. It would be interesting to see the full version of what Mott wrote rather than the abridged versio0n that was published.

It is stated in the paper that “these Black metallurgists developed one of the most important innovations of the industrial revolution for their
own purposes”. This is too strong a claim but their efforts should not be ignored whether or not Cort learned what had been done. Nothing done in Jamaica was relevant to the puddling of pig iron which Cort describes in his second patent..  This is the process which became  extremely important although it took workers at Merthyr Tydfil considerable experimentation to turn Cort’s idea into a workable process.

Jenny Bulstrode’s paper was published Open Access. This makes it more accessible although the mention in the Guardian and New Scientist helped. When I looked it had been viewed 1750 times.  I see that the article on Henry Cort  in Wikipedia was almost immediately updated to include the claim that he knew about what had been done in Jamaica. The article has been updated again to say that the connection to Jamaica has only been hypothesised but it is being accepted by others. One example is an article on the 8th July in The News, a local paper for the Portsmouth area. it says “Councillor Sean Woodward, leader of Fareham Borough Council, described the findings as ‘the industrial espionage of its day’. ‘It looks like he stole the technology from 76 Jamaican slaves,’ he said”.

I am glad that the HMS has adopted Platinum Open Access so that the Journal’s contents make available  an authoritative source of information to a wider audience.

[Ray Powell]

My view of Henry Cort has been influenced by R. A. Mott’s book “Henry Cort : The Great Refiner”. Mott gives a favourable account of him which seems very different from the view of the paper’s author.. It is some years since I read the book but I have quickly gone through parts of it again. There does not seem to be any reference in the book to a connection to Jamaica. It would be very interesting if someone who has done original research could comment.

[Ray Powell]

When I said article in my post I meant the paper. I have also looked at the article in the Guardian.

[Ray Powell]

I have quickly read the article. It gives a history of skilled iron working in Africa and its relation to slave trading. It suggests that Black metallurgists , in Jamaica, had made use of the grooved rolls used in processing sugar to roll bundles of scrap iron to produce good quality bar iron in the 1770s. It suggests that Cort learned of this from his relative, John Cort. who had been to Jamaica. He then patented the method. The article suggests Cort knew the source of the money he was give by his partner, Jellicoe,  When he was found responsible for paying off the debt the article says “Friends helped him pay debts and secure a small pension, and in their efforts launched the myth of the heroic inventor” The article does not suggest the the puddling technique was used in Jamaica.

[Author]

Posts